Formatting

So, when I debate, there's usually rebuttals I can predict that my opponent will bring up. I'm a six-shooter theory guy, where I like to keep my extra bullets in reserve instead of throwing everything out right away. Do you prefer to head off rebuttals in your arguments, like your opening statement, or wait until they appear and rebut them separately.

It depends. If the things I refute I have actual meaning to them, instead of terrible argumentation, yes I will put an introduction first. 

If they don't, and they are obviously in the wrong, or they have basically already lost, I will simply only post the rebuttals.

Do the inverse, stick to the points that can and will bait out rebuttals that you know how to shut down.

As for the points you don't know for sure you won't have turned against you, mention them quietly as a passing remark.

This is strongest against medium opponents. It is weakest against terrible/troll opponents as their rebuttals, if they occur, will be out of left field so you should not restrain yourself as much with them. Against competent opponents, you should slightly do the pre-raise and shut down thing but when it's possible to bring up the rebuttal-to-their-rebuttal as a contention of its own, this is the best way to handle competent opponents.